Scoutfish

"Exibar, It might be a little too easy for me to sit here and play the role of Monday Quarterback. I don't know exactly what I might have done. I don't know the Lads who were there, I don't know how I might have been feeling at the time" I agree with this line of thinking from Eamonn. And I know( well remember ) from being a kid once myself that most young men would rather do extra punishment than to admit to what could have been an honest mistake or just not thinking about something. "I held up the remaining two cans and asked the scouts if they knew what they were, and why there were only 2 left when there should have been 4. None of them spoke up, I asked again, no-one spoke up." At this point, IF it was a scout, thety may have been totally willing and wanting to tell you, as soon as they could catch you by yourself or at least out of earshot. "I then proceeded to mention that there is a thief among the troop..." WEll, any chance of a scout admitting to what could be an honest mistake is severely hurt now. Without pinpointing him, you already called him out as a thief. " and all they have to do is speak up and that will be the end of it. Again, silence..." End of the discussion about who the thief was, or that the thief took it, or would there be an opportunity for an explanation? And yet, it's still IN FRONT OF EVERYBODY! (caps for emphasis) Now, like Eamonn said, it's real easy to pick your reation apart. And hindsight is 20/20. The one thing i would have done differently, and might have changed everything is if you asked the "thief" to think about it and that they had 24 hours to come forward to you privately OR that they could talk to the PL or SPL in the same confidence and without fear of repercussion while in the field. And I'll readily admit that I am a Cub Scouter, so the dynamics may be different with a troop, but we don't make a huge deal about stuff in the field short of actually physical violence or threats involving physical violence or imminent harm. Then again, mom or dad is usually there to do some whooping if it comes to it. Biggest point I,m trying to make is this: Alot of boys in this age range would rather get their butts whipped than to face the embarrassment of admitting they stole it or just took it by mistake or misunderstanding

Having had time to let this thread roll around...well, bounce around my head for a couple days.....I have to agree with NJ. Suppose you are 100 percent, without a doubt , to the very core of your existance convinced that the moon was in fact, made of green cheese. If I am not willing to even consider the possibility that it's true...does that mean that I am not rational? Well, it does in your perspective as explained by the chart. Now, suppose I decide to write a thread saying that water was in fact, so dry, it pulled moisture out of your skin by extreme osmosis...therefore, when you felt the moisture on your skin, you thought water was wet. If you do not consider the possibility I could be correct..does that mean you are not rational or able to hold a discussion? Yeah, NJ has it correct when he says: "... one's perception of one's position on the chart is not necessarily where other people perceive you to be." So, either you agree or you are just wrong!

We have no idea what happened at camp other than the story from somebody who was not there, wasn't happy her son was there and basically...already regretter he son being there before he even went. But what does sound familiar to me from personal association with it before is this: "My poor,poor super innocent sweet angelic child was beat up by a bigger , older scout. Nobody helped him. Matter of fact, the entire troop, the adult leadership, - and even the COR and and by association...the CO - encouraged it. But be sure of one thing: My son was 100 percent, absoulutrely innocent and did not, could not in any way, instigated anything whatsoever!" Again, who knows whats going on, but like I said, that tune has a familiar ring to it. It's one I have heard from friends, from neighbors, from co workers, and from scout moms and dads too. Their kids would run around and be pestering, picking on, irritating and flat out instigating trouble, and when somebody finally had enough of it and reacted... the parent wanted somebody's head on a platter. Back in the day, we had a mom on our firedept. Her boys were angels. They were just about the living definition of saints if you asked her. Well, those two little cherubs were kicked off school bus after school bus after school bus. Finally, the mom had to drive them to school. But it wasn't her boy's fault. Nosiree! It was all those awful adults ganging up on her sons. Had a scout mom who's son really should have been on something like Ritalin. Bouncing off the walls isn't so bad, but running around hitting, kicking and even spitting on people. He'd spit on total strangers too. Mom blamed everybody. Her son was just being precious. Those people were being ugly! Again, may not be the same case here..but the tune is soooo familiar.

WAIT JUST A MINUTE THERE BUSTER! I just happen to know that "Webelore" is when older Webelos Scouts tell younger Webelos Scouts the horrors of Camp, Boy Scout initiation, and other scarey stuff...while sitting around a campfire! And a "Webeloribus" is a multi seat, heavy duty vehicle that is used to take an entire Webelos Den to Council camp- requireing a commercial drivers license!

"Gods morality is consistent for all time. That's why it is the perfect reference for humans to behave in peace and equality, if they ever decide to choose so." First things first: I belive in the same God as you. At least i believe so if we are both talking about the God in the King James Bible. But going back to what you said proves my point:

Yeah, I have to agree with SP. My original plans for this year was to be a Webelos Den Leader. But our CM was getting burned out and along with the CC and COR, asked me to become the next CM. Now, I never would have volunteered. Truth be told, I am the last person I would have asked to do it. If I had to rate me , I would have given myself a big thumbs down. Well, I guess I would have ben wrong. It seems that the entire leadership thinks I am doing great and have stepped things up a notch and have brought fun back to the meetings. Shocked mysellf too. (I was soo worried about screwing it all up. I guess it sunk in when I would see the boys at various places around town and they run up to give me a high five or just want to talk. Parents tell me that their Cubs think I am great and enjoy pack meetings again. The ultimate compliment? I had a dad tell me that his Tiger Cub went home and tried to teach his younger sister a song I made up becase he likd it so much. Point is: I never would have given it a seconds thought to asking me to be the CM. So I guess I will retract what I said about the quiet guy. He might be one of the greatest CM's your pack ever has. And I still get nervous before every pack meeting!

The coolest part of the survey is the open dialog boxes where somebody can write down whatever. To many surveys are limited to only what is asked, and closes off the ability for other concerns, ideas or thoughts to be shared.

So bring on those arguments. Just bring some evidence as well. That is my whole point! What evidence? And what would back it up? As for science, again my point: People bring what they think is "absolute and final" proof. But it is only absolute and final if they decide to let if be . Yeah, science says this, and a few years later, it changes it's story and says that instead. Flat earth, sun obits the earth, the heart is actually the body's control center. etc.. In another post, somebody claims that God is the ultimate authority of what is moral. Truth be told, I follow the same God, but I wouldn't make that arguement to a person who beleives in another god because I might as well use Star Trek as my source of ultimate authority. You get me on that? I can argue the King James bible all day long, but that would mean absolutely ZILCH to somebody who uses and follows the Qur'an. Same thing for me: If somebody cites the Qur'an as the reasoning as to why their claim is true..it means no more to me than if Mickey Mouse wrote it if I do not follow the Qur'an. I might respect their view on something, but their source has no credibility to me. Overall, my point was this: If half of all the scientists in the world stood behind anything I claimed as to be fact anf to support my claims...it would only be worth as much as tyhose who trust or believe those scientists. But if you actually believe or trusted the other half of the scientists, then I would still not be able to credibly support the claims I made. That make sense to you? My point is this: People can cite sources and authority on any subject matter, but that authority or cited source is credible if that source is trusted or believed.

"oh come on now... everyone KNOWS the plural of Webelos is Webeli." You know...as wrong as that is.....it sounds right!

Wow! Tough one! I agree in that you don't want a quiet guy being CM..at least not during Pack meetings where he neds to e spontaneous, loud, boisterous and also, he nees to perform for the boys- not the parents. Gotta get the boys excited and let them burn off energy. But yeah, if nobody else volunteers or bothers to step up, what else can you do. ASk the Bear DL if he can either find a better CM or if he wants to step up himself.

"I understand this is emotional discussion for you Scoutfish, but you are still missing the point." Nah, it's not emotional for me. But is is emotional for you. All of your arguements go back to the premis of "It's not moral because I don't agree with it." A: "I don't think man or animals are born counter to their instincts," I agree! They are not counter to their instincts. But you do understand what instinct means, right? It's not a choice. It's not conscious thought. 1instinct noun \ˈin-ˌstiŋ(k)t Definition of INSTINCT 1: a natural or inherent aptitude, impulse, or capacity 2a : a largely inheritable and unalterable tendency of an organism to make a complex and specific response to environmental stimuli without involving reason b : behavior that is mediated by reactions below the conscious level (from Meriam Webster) B: "A little study of human physiology shows that physical homosexual attraction makes no sense to our human instincts. So homosexuality must be emotional, and if it is emotional, it can be controlled by choice." But more in depth study shows that physiology also couldn't explain how bees fly. Physiology also freaked out when it met the Duck-billed Platypus because it went against so may ytruths in physiology. You know what a phobia is right? An unreasonable fear, that we cannot control even with rational thought. WE don't understand why we have phobias, and alot of them make no sense at all...but still not a choice. What it comes down to is exactly what you said before: "Morality has become what one feels at the moment." And just like fashion, what's in style this year may be faux pas next year. So, people can stick their fingers in their ears and say "nah nah nah nah nah ..I can't hear you" , but that doesn't change the reality that what you consider moral is nothing but a feeling or choice by a group of people who cite references of others who share similar beliefs.

While not knowing the proper name of it..I had a friend who works maintainace at a local hospital to "procure" a couple of those curved surgical sewing needles for me. You have to use a pair of needle-nose pliars with the needle, but pockets are still fully functional..to the extent I still never use them!

"Shoulder belt loops?" WEll, only in Cub Scouts! It's a cost saving idea. Instead of buying shoulder loops AND belt loops AND a belt..... you clip your belt loops on your epaulets.

"Sorry maybe "requirements" wasn't the correct word they have completed at least 12 of the achievements to earn the bear badge." Nah, what Scoutnut meant was that the cubs can graduate (or crossover) to Webelos wether they met all acheivements or not if the camporee is the end of your year. Every CUB scout advances the next year wether rank badge was earned or not.

I was going to past a link to a PFD that had a true/false test and a Whittling Chip oath you could print out for the scouts. No, they do not have to take it, but is usefull in reenforcing safety and showng how well they have learned. Like I said, was gonna post it, but apparently, I have some sort of redirect virus screwing with my computer. Anyways, I went to a dollar store and bout 4 or 5 3packs of Lever 200 soap. Open them up and let them dry out for a few days. They make great practice block for carving. Also, I'd recomend a lock blade knife so it doesn'yt close on their finger when the pull backwards on the knife. We do ours on our own on the den level. Never had to go to any council camps or district camps, but does make a great den activity while at pack campouts.

You ever read something, and suddenly have a thought hit you? No, not really an epithany, because I didn't suddenly see something with clarity. Matter of fact, what I suddenly saw was actually the beginning of a string of more questions. So, somebody types a statement in a thread and is asked to cite a source that backs that statement up.Or they list a source that emphacizes or supports their own arguement, and are asked for more clarity by listing other sources to back up that source. But here's the thing: What good is a source? Really. What good does it do to provide a source? I mean, I could list the Holy Bible as a source to back up my arguements about what is moral, yet, a peerson from another religion can equally cite their own bible( for lack of a better word) as an equally credible source, And how do you prove yours is more credible? Because you yourself belive it more? That's like argueing that dairy farmers say milk is better than green tea as opposed to a bunch of Chinese farmers who say green tea is better . It still comes down to personal feelings and beliefs. And we all know that a poll can be entirely and completely manipulated by who is polled, what the questions are, but more importantly, what questions are ommitted. Then take science for example: Science used to absolutely declare the world was flat. Science! You can't argue science now can you? Then there are times that people can cite themselves as the source. For example: A Vermont Cub Scout Pack goes camping in January in 4 for of snow. Everybody has a blast and can't wait to go again. A Fla scouter staes that the weather was too extreme for that pack to have went. Neither can cite a specific source to back their side. But both are correct in the fact that the Vermont pack lives in that weather every day anyways and are used to it. Plus, being part of that pack, the poster knows from personal experience that nobody in the pack complained or had issues. On the other side, the Fla scouter know that his warm weather climte pack gets miserable in temps under 40 degrees because thay are just not used to such weather. And again, sources are only as credible as those who believe or feel the same way. Look at Global Warming. The "expert" scientific data gathering , fact considering, no playing around ..scientists cannot agree on what is causing it, what is lessing it, or if it even exists. The Bible is only as reliable as those who share that faith or belife and is no more proof than the bible( again, for lack of better word) of any other religion. Matter of fact, religion itself should actually take away from credibility as a souce as it only means that a bunch of like minded people agreed on something. Like minded meaning they only listen to orvrecognize those who share their own views. Which in itself is promoting ignorance( yes, that includes me too). No,I do not mean that meanly or with spite, but it's true. "What's your source?" "My source is the Webster dictionary." "Well, my encyclopedia Britannica says your source is wrong." Same as AA versus the Southern Baptist Coalition. Both can cite sources, but the only true proof either has for it's side is: "That's how we feel!" Even in BSA citing a source means nothing. If you are predisposed to not agree, you will find fault in, and disregard the source. G2SS: Is it dead set or just general guides that apply to "most" situations. Insignia Guide for uniforms. Says "should and should not" but never says "must, have to, required to or no choice but.." Everybody recognizes you cannot add to requirements, but each has his/her own version of what adding menas: Boyscout handbook: is it part of the uniform if not mentioned in IG? Is requireing it considered adding to requirements. Cite your source all you want, those who agree will still agree, those who don't , still won't. So, why bother asking somebody to cite a source whan in all likelyhood, you will find fault with and completely blow off the source as being non credible. All info gathered in this post supported by random anonymous non solicited opinions in Facebook!

" I despise the technology pocket for many reasons (it seemingly undermines many units no electronics rule, sewing patches on it is less then fun, it does not fit my phone properly...) but it works." Just curious...does anybody actually use this pocket? I have not seen one in use yet by anybody...even during the limited troop contact I occasionally have. And I agree, it makes sewing on a patch a pain in the butt!

shortridge, Dang, I wish there was some way we could "read" others tone of writing. I'm not upset or even slightly elevated about it. It wasn't your post alone that made me write this , but the most recent of many, many comments from others who have snidely corrected "offenders". To be clear, You post was not taken as snide or rude by me. But I have seen others look down their noses while correcting people for saying "wi or WII" What made me think of it was the Uniform threads where some posters will get their non officail scout underwear in a big ole wad about one single button not being correctly buttoned, but then go around spouting off what G2SS says or why one "Hair must be completely and totally combed in a proper style at an adult run OA election"". Okay, I made up that last qouted reference, but the point is the same: ADults takes control over what is supposed to be a youth run function, they abbreviate at their own whiw, and then bust somebody else for not following the letter of the BSA "law". Nah, I saw your post as informative. You correctly stated that WI and WII were not offivcial terms, and left it at that. I did not see you chastize or snidely look down at the OP. But between three or four different threads, I felt the need to write this thread.

I have heard "yours in scouting" only mentioned here at this site. My best guess? It's a freindly scouter to scouter sign off, as in "Your friend.." , "Your comrade in Arms..", "With best wishes..", " With all my love.." , or " In God's service.."! Of course, growing up, a few friends and myself would say "Later Tater.." or "See you around butt-munch!"

Yeah, I said Webelos I and Webelos II. No, it is not an offical designation or term. But you knew exactly what I was talking about and exactly who I meant. There is also no G2SS either. It is called Guide to Safe Scouting. But when you or I say "G2SS"..everyone knows exactly what we mean. So why do people ..ooops..I meant scouters, get so upset and bent out of shape about that useage? Seriously, as much as people claim to hate UP ( oops again - I meant Uniform Police) of which there is no offical designation. So why gang up on the use of Webelos I and Webelos II. You want to know why I use it? Becaise it's easier and faster to type WI and WII than spell it out completely. Verbally, in my pack, we speak the words "Webes 1 and Webes 2" or say "Webelos 1 and Webelos 2" . And the funny thing is, we never ever had a single parent, scout, scouter or anybody from council or district get confused by this. If you prefer to enuciate the entire wording of "first year Webelos" or "Second year Webelos"..that's cool with me. But don't get on my case about saying Webelos I or Webelos II unless you yourself fully and specifically say the following in their correct entirety also: Guide To Safe Scouting instead of G2SS Eagle Board of Review instead of EBOR Boeard of Review instead of BOR Position of Responcibility instead of POR Friends of Scouting instead of FOS Wood Badge participant instead of WB'er Yeah, I know what you are talking about, but you also knew what I and many others were talking about. Why can I say that? Because in order to correct me or others about what is "the proper way" it means you had to first know what I was talking about! And if you knew what I was talking about...then that's all that matters! YIS (oops! ) Yours in Scouting Mark(This message has been edited by scoutfish)

Just wait til next year when "red tape" is replaced with the new centenial "green tape"!

In my area, there is a pack that I could completely understand see those questions being asked. This pack is a new pack whose leadership broke off from our pack. (It was a needed thing as our pack had members driving from 15 miles away due to their not being a closer alternative) Things is, tose leaders could burn through some money extremely fast. For some reason, I could buy 4 packs of hotdogs,5 packs of buns, 3 bags of chips, and 5 gallons of tea for around $20.00 . THose other members would turn in $52.00 worth of reciepts for the same thing. Beats me as to how. I support the new pack and even went and bought 4 plates at their BBQ fundraiser. A week later, talking to another leader within that new pack..I learned that the (husband/wife) CC and CM burnet through $3,000.00 in 3 weeks. What did they buy? WEll..nobody really knows, but are being told it was a fireprof safe for paperwork, and the rest went to admin supplies and paerwork and council fes. Dues? $75.00 to join the pack PLUS council fees. Thats why those questions are asked: Scouts pay twice as much as our unit, have nothing to show for it, fundraiser brings in $3,000.00 that went poof after the CC/CM walked away with it! ? Incidentally, that pack now has only 2 dens consisting of 6 boys. WE had several people come back to us because the pack never did anything and the CC was hostile and agressive to anybody who didn't see 100% eye to eye . 3 DL's quit under the accusations they were not "Good Christinas" when they disagreed with the CC. So: 1)Is this pack on a budget? Who knows, you'd be "unChristain if you ask ". 2) How much dues is the scout paying? $&5.00 ( not councting council /national fees. 3)How much money is in units treasury? Who knows, nobody has heard or seen anything to show for it except "Trust us, we have it where it needs to be and you don't have to know....and you are a heathen if you don't trust us!" As for most units, it means nothing.

I thought it was kinda cool. A reflective image mirroring one's inner feelings, but without being too over the top with that "artsy snobbish" air to it. It was different, which was cool.

My predecessor, was CM for 6 1/2 years. She was getting burned out and ready to let go of the reigns. Well, our pack is a school calendar pack. WE have a minimum of 1 summer fun day during June, July, and August, but after that, it's up to den leaders and the dens if they want to do anything else. Hey, kids aren't the only ones who need some summer vacation. So anyways, The old CM asked me to takeover about 2 weks before June. I was not officially taking over until we started back in last wek of Aug/ first week of Sept, but I started transitioning during the summer: Meeting up with DE, going to scout office and handling paperwork, getting approval from CO, tidying up any loose ends with training. I also headed up the summer funs days and really started keeping in touch with all DL's too. Since I was originally going to become a Weebelos DL, I also had to find a replacement for that too. Anyways, by the time we started back up for the year this year..I was holding the reigns and everything went smoothly!

AS long as you do not tell the boys you were kissing the ASM's....it should be okay! Point being, the only time anything with any kind of sexual nature should ever be discussed would be if talking about strangers and molesters, kidnappers( officer friendly stuff) determining YP issues, or talking about the difference between animals -ex: Male cardinals are red while females are brown. Mallard males are green headed with a white band around neck while females are a mottled brown. You want to say why your own personal experiences while hiking proves that layering is better than 9one bulky garmet is okay. Talking about kissing up your wife...wether on the lips or her butt is a no go. Kissing up to the DE shouldn't be brought up either!